About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)
? >> pentagon is talking about having less aircraft carrier presence. the foreign-policy establishment could see some of its dollars cut. foreign aid is never the favorite thing of the congress. some of those accounts could be pressured. a lot of these cuts ordered by sequestration are essentially dumb. they are acrsooss the board. certain things are exempt. ibo who run these cabinet departments often lack the authority just -- people who run these cabinet departments often lack the authority did say we are going -- authority to say we are going to keep this or that. us toes it hard for represent ourselves as a model that ought to be in related by others -- to be emulated by others. >> what do you hear when you talk to leaders around the world, not just about sequestration -- what are people saying to you? .> all those things america's inability to tackle its deficit and debt. able shake their heads. at the end of the day, -- people shake their heads. because at the end of the day, they are dependent on the united states. the united states controls the reserve currency, the dollar. a lot of thes
: for the first time, pentagon leaders said today they had supported arming the rebels in syria. defense secretary leon panetta and general martin dempsey chair of the joint chiefs said they made that recommendation to president obama. panetta told a senate hearing that, in the end, the president decided against sending in arms. instead, the u.s. has provided only humanitarian aid to the rebels. secretary panetta also defended the military's response to the attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi, libya. the assault killed ambassador chris stevens and three other americans. panetta testified there'd been no specific warning of an imminent attack, so u.s. forces were too far away to respond. >> the united states military, as i've said, is not and frankly should not be a 911 service capable of arriving on the scene within minutes to every possible contingency around the world. the u.s. military has neither the resources nor the responsibility to have a firehouse next to every u.s. facility in the world. >> sreenivasan: republican senator john mccain of arizona argued the military could have deploye
it calls "non- lethal" assistance. and with panetta's departure from the pentagon today, plus clinton's last week and petraeus's resignation in 2012, general dempsey is the only known remaining advocate of arming the rebels still in a top advisory role. i'm joined who served in the obama administration state departments and is now dean of the school of advanced international studies at johns hopkins university. and andrew tabler, a senior fellow at the washington institute for near east policy. what were the main schools of thought. how did the camps break down in this argument inside the administration on what to do about syria, andrew? >> basically you have a discussion about syria about all the different options. and it really comes down to this. the white house was hedgingment they really did not want to get involved in syria. they have a firm policy to stay out of the middle east and would like to pull back. at the same time the agencies that deal with syria and the problem there, which is growing and mushrooming, the state department, cia and to a certain extent the department o
, if you will. we do have an opportunity to talk to several people within the pentagon and what we found we were very disappointed by was that they weren't taking the steps that they really needed to take to address this problem. >> brown: is this for you an act of... is it journalism? is it art? i mean it's film making. how do you see what your doing? >> well, i guess i see myself as an artist. but as an artist i think you take on the greatest challenge you can. to put all these things together, the art, film making, journalism into one, i see it as an artistic enterprise but at the same time, of course, when you're dealing with this kind of subject, you have to be very journalistically precise which we were. but it's a challenge. i mean this film was being made actually for two audiences. one was for the film making audience. it's been very successful. it was nominated for academy award. it's won many audience awards but it was also made for policy makers in washington d.c. >> brown: you had them in mind absolutely. i remember cut by cut we'd be thinking, this will play to an audience but
is in october. so it's a lot of money in a short amount of time, and it will affect pentagon workers, and they've made a point, they're going to have to be furloughed a day a week beginning inapril. you are going to probably have individual stories of hurt and pain, the family that saved up for a vacation and shows up at a national park, two kids in the backseat, and it's closed. that's what happened during the government shutdown. it's stories like that that can go viral. you are going to have kids turned away from headstart because they can't afford to cover that many people. but it's not all going to be felt in one day. and frankly, people are so cynical about government and government spending that most people think, you know, either the politicians are going to solve this at the last minute, or it is not going to matter anyway. so you haven't -- the president has tried to gin up an emotional reaction in the country among his supporters, and i don't think that's really happened. >> to add to that, only 44 billion of the 85 billion in cuts will go into effect in 2013, amounting to about 0.6
you briefly, if you would, because given the kind of changes you are talk pentagon, people paying online, for example. where is this headed? does the american public have to get used to a lesser service and perhaps at some point the end of the postal service? >> no, not at all. we think the future is very bright, as long as you take the steps to get the financein order. our plan-- our plan has us getting back in the black and paying the debt down. now, will there be changes? absolutely. some of the changes we discussed already. we have already made plenty of changes. since the year 2000, this organization, the postal service has reducedly the head count-- head count, payroll, not jobs or job descriptions, payroll-- by 305,000 employees, 193,000 since 2008. we have-- our people do a great job. they're very productive. we have done anything and everything in our power to try to catch up to the loss that we've got in volume. people say, suggest we raise prices dramatically. that chase more volume away. we are trying to take a very business-like approach. we think it's a win-win. ever
to that point, all of a sudden we've got 3,000 dead americans, the trade towers are taken out, the pentagon's been hit. if it hadn't been for the folks on 93 they'd have taken out the white house or the capitol on washington, d.c. worst attack in our history. worse than pearl harbor by far. and it was our job to make certain it didn't happen again. we were concerned for a couple of rps, partly because the expectation was there would be a follow on attack, nearly everybody believed it. but we also received intelligence that al qaeda was trying to get their hands on deadlier weapons. >> rose: do you regret nothing about the aftermath in terms of how we -- >> regarding 9/11? >> rose: everything that we did and that you were and the president were at the center of the response to 9/11. look back and say "we regret nothing"? >> that's my view. >> rose: none? >> correct. >> rose: you know this has been debated, too. >> sure. >> rose: were we prepared for the consequences after saddam was overthrown? >> well, that was the second proposition. you asked me about the aftermath of 9/11, the policies w
critical american infrastructure the pentagon is planning a range of defensive measures including a massive expansion of its own signer security force. joining me to discuss the developing background is david sanger of the "new york times." he cowrote today's front page story on the subject. joining us later is dune lawrence of bloomberg businessweek if and michael riley of bloomberg. they are learning everything they could. >> so far it's clear they've been into those systems it's not clear they've ever done anything to them. >> rose: why -- >> that's the remarkable question charlie. always the issue is intent and the degree to which the political leadership in china actually is knowledgeable about this and to what degree of control it has over it. because chinese command and control is not always what we image it from afar. in this case, unit 61398 which is the major cyber intelligence unit for the pla but not their own cyber operation. sort of their equivalent of the national security agency or our cyber command which is located at the national security agency in fort mead. >> rose: c
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)